K5 IIs oversaturated reds

**hjoseph7** · 07-07-2014, 06:58 PM

I recently purchased a K5 IIs , the default photo rendering for this camera is bright. Coming from a Canon camera I found this much too bright and contrasty so I switched to Natural. In Natural mode all of my indoor pictures came out pretty natural looking, so I boosted the saturation by one notch. I use to do this with my Canon camera to give the image some punch without me having to do it in PS. Keep in mind that I didn't have too many subjects to shoot at indoors so everything looked OK.

Today I went out and took pictures of an ice cream stand with a red roof. The Reds looked so bright they were almost scarlet and glowing. After I downloaded the pictures to my computer, I decreased the Red channel by about 60% so that everything looked Natural. This is sort of unusual for me since I never had to tone down any color channel by that much on any picture . Is this a normal thing with the K5 IIs, or is it my camera ?

Last edited by hjoseph7; 07-07-2014 at 07:55 PM.

Parallax · 07-07-2014, 07:19 PM

First question: Is your monitor calibrated?
Second question: Why are you shooting jpeg and letting the quy(s) who wrote the firmware decide how your pictures look, instead of shooting raw and taking control of the image yourself?

**Digitalis** · 07-07-2014, 08:01 PM

Reds are always a bit tricky to capture accurately no matter which camera you are working with - using a colour calibrated set up is certainly a step in the right direction. It also pays to know that silicon sensors are particularly sensitive to reds, so using exposure compensation of -0.3 for overcast light or 0.7 for full sunlight will reduce this problem.

Pentax K5IIs - SMCP-FA31mm f/1.8 ASPH Limited.

Brooke Meyer · 07-07-2014, 08:59 PM

3 examples with 3 camera bodies; K20, K5 and K5IIs. An example of why I shoot DNGs. LED Theater lighting is the worst, my default Adobe Camera Raw settings for that is at least -50 on Blue and Red saturation. These were all printed, right to edge of the gamut for the paper and printer. I typically reduce Luminance first, so it's not blown and I can see texture, them I adjust Saturation until it fits in gamut. Really tough to do without a calibrated monitor and accurate ICC profiles.

rawr · 07-08-2014, 12:29 AM

Just to throw a few more variables into the mix....

Your JPG 'Quality Level' - aka compression level - settings in camera [****/***/**/*] can also make a difference to colour rendering sometimes. So too may your noise reduction settings, sometimes very visibly so for red with the K-3.

**hjoseph7** · 07-08-2014, 03:08 AM

I was able to go into the Post Processing Filters in the camera and manipulate the settings a bit. Seems like a -3 saturation and -1 contrast gave me the results I was looking for. Originally I had a +1 saturation and +1 contrast. My compression level was at **** 4-star maximum. Here is a before and after examples. I have other pictures where the Reds really look Scarlet !

rawr · 07-08-2014, 05:58 AM

I also have to ask: do you have a UV or protection filter on your lens? It's another variable to consider. UV filters often have a variety of impacts on camera IQ, including on the visible light spectrum.

**hjoseph7** · 07-08-2014, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by rawr

I also have to ask: do you have a UV or protection filter on your lens? It's another variable to consider. UV filters often have a variety of impacts on camera IQ, including on the visible light spectrum.

Yes I do happen to have a Sunpak UV filter that came with the lens a 16-45mm f4. Could this be increasing the red saturation ?

rawr · 07-08-2014, 08:04 AM

Originally posted by hjoseph7

Yes I do happen to have a Sunpak UV filter that came with the lens a 16-45mm f4. Could this be increasing the red saturation ?

It's possible. As you can see from the pic below, UV filters work across the visible spectrum, as well as IR and UV. Different filters are of varying quality and could impact colour tonality.

As well as have a range of other dire effects on IQ. Just use a hood.

**hjoseph7** · 07-08-2014, 08:17 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

First question: Is your monitor calibrated?
Second question: Why are you shooting jpeg and letting the quy(s) who wrote the firmware decide how your pictures look, instead of shooting raw and taking control of the image yourself?

Because sometimes I have to shoot assembly line pre-school portraits up to 500 per weekend. No time to fiddle with raw.

Brooke Meyer · 07-08-2014, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by hjoseph7

Because sometimes I have to shoot assembly line pre-school portraits up to 500 per weekend. No time to fiddle with raw.

500 isn't so much. I cover some events for a local online publication (besides my dance work where 2,000 exposures per performance in typical).

Open 100 DNGs at a time in Camera Raw, delete the stuff that doesn't work, apply global adjustments, save, batch rename, batch out to JPEGs, upload to publication for editor and public galleries.

Here's are a bunch Cary Citizen Community including last Friday,

IchabodCrane · 07-08-2014, 10:30 AM

The neon reds are a bigger problem on Pentax cameras than most others which I attribute to Pentax trying to make their JPEG engine create "punch" OOC JPEG images. I haven't found an acceptable solution in two years of trying that deals with the reds without adversely affecting other colors. Shoot RAW if it's a problem which is really a poor excuse for Ricoh not to fix this.

**hjoseph7** · 07-08-2014, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by IchabodCrane

The neon reds are a bigger problem on Pentax cameras than most others which I attribute to Pentax trying to make their JPEG engine create "punch" OOC JPEG images. I haven't found an acceptable solution in two years of trying that deals with the reds without adversely affecting other colors. Shoot RAW if it's a problem which is really a poor excuse for Ricoh not to fix this.

In Photoshop I only de-saturated the Red channel by about 40%(estimate) . I notice it still gave me a slightly blue tint and it also toned down the orange in some of the flowers. I could have created a mask to only hit the roof of the ice-cream stand but, these pictures are not going into publication.

---------- Post added 07-08-14 at 12:54 PM ----------

Originally posted by Brooke Meyer

500 isn't so much. I cover some events for a local online publication (besides my dance work where 2,000 exposures per performance in typical).

Open 100 DNGs at a time in Camera Raw, delete the stuff that doesn't work, apply global adjustments, save, batch rename, batch out to JPEGs, upload to publication for editor and public galleries.

Here's are a bunch Cary Citizen Community including last Friday,

"Open 100 DNGs at a time in Camera Raw, delete the stuff that doesn't work, apply global adjustments, save, batch rename, batch out to JPEGs, upload to publication for editor and public galleries. "

My boss would have a fit !

07-07-2014, 06:58 PM	#1
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,048	K5 IIs oversaturated reds I recently purchased a K5 IIs , the default photo rendering for this camera is bright. Coming from a Canon camera I found this much too bright and contrasty so I switched to Natural. In Natural mode all of my indoor pictures came out pretty natural looking, so I boosted the saturation by one notch. I use to do this with my Canon camera to give the image some punch without me having to do it in PS. Keep in mind that I didn't have too many subjects to shoot at indoors so everything looked OK. Today I went out and took pictures of an ice cream stand with a red roof. The Reds looked so bright they were almost scarlet and glowing. After I downloaded the pictures to my computer, I decreased the Red channel by about 60% so that everything looked Natural. This is sort of unusual for me since I never had to tone down any color channel by that much on any picture . Is this a normal thing with the K5 IIs, or is it my camera ? Last edited by hjoseph7; 07-07-2014 at 07:55 PM.

07-07-2014, 07:19 PM	#2
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	First question: Is your monitor calibrated? Second question: Why are you shooting jpeg and letting the quy(s) who wrote the firmware decide how your pictures look, instead of shooting raw and taking control of the image yourself? Last edited by Parallax; 07-07-2014 at 08:15 PM.

07-07-2014, 08:59 PM	#4
Brooke Meyer Guest	Reds are Tough 3 examples with 3 camera bodies; K20, K5 and K5IIs. An example of why I shoot DNGs. LED Theater lighting is the worst, my default Adobe Camera Raw settings for that is at least -50 on Blue and Red saturation. These were all printed, right to edge of the gamut for the paper and printer. I typically reduce Luminance first, so it's not blown and I can see texture, them I adjust Saturation until it fits in gamut. Really tough to do without a calibrated monitor and accurate ICC profiles.

07-08-2014, 03:08 AM	#6
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,048 Original Poster	I was able to go into the Post Processing Filters in the camera and manipulate the settings a bit. Seems like a -3 saturation and -1 contrast gave me the results I was looking for. Originally I had a +1 saturation and +1 contrast. My compression level was at **** 4-star maximum. Here is a before and after examples. I have other pictures where the Reds really look Scarlet ! Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Contacting Pentax about Video Firmware Update for K5/K5 IIs	truepentaxfan	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	01-19-2014 12:38 PM
Guidance on a K5-II or K5-IIs and lenses	Kubikle Free	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	12-22-2013 01:07 AM
K5 IIs Improvements over K5	TooLoose	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	24	09-15-2013 02:43 PM
K5 vs. K5 II and IIs	JBWPhoto	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	15	12-31-2012 11:14 PM
Why do K5 IIs reds look different?	sanjeevdas	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	12	11-18-2012 03:10 PM

07-07-2014, 08:01 PM	#3
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Reds are always a bit tricky to capture accurately no matter which camera you are working with - using a colour calibrated set up is certainly a step in the right direction. It also pays to know that silicon sensors are particularly sensitive to reds, so using exposure compensation of -0.3 for overcast light or 0.7 for full sunlight will reduce this problem. Pentax K5IIs - SMCP-FA31mm f/1.8 ASPH Limited.

07-08-2014, 12:29 AM	#5
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Just to throw a few more variables into the mix.... Your JPG 'Quality Level' - aka compression level - settings in camera [**///] can also make a difference to colour rendering sometimes. So too may your noise reduction settings, sometimes very visibly so for red with the K-3.

07-08-2014, 05:58 AM	#7
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	I also have to ask: do you have a UV or protection filter on your lens? It's another variable to consider. UV filters often have a variety of impacts on camera IQ, including on the visible light spectrum.

07-08-2014, 07:46 AM	#8
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,048 Original Poster	Originally posted by rawr I also have to ask: do you have a UV or protection filter on your lens? It's another variable to consider. UV filters often have a variety of impacts on camera IQ, including on the visible light spectrum. Yes I do happen to have a Sunpak UV filter that came with the lens a 16-45mm f4. Could this be increasing the red saturation ?

07-08-2014, 08:04 AM	#9
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by hjoseph7 Yes I do happen to have a Sunpak UV filter that came with the lens a 16-45mm f4. Could this be increasing the red saturation ? It's possible. As you can see from the pic below, UV filters work across the visible spectrum, as well as IR and UV. Different filters are of varying quality and could impact colour tonality. As well as have a range of other dire effects on IQ. Just use a hood.

07-08-2014, 08:17 AM	#10
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,048 Original Poster	Originally posted by Parallax First question: Is your monitor calibrated? Second question: Why are you shooting jpeg and letting the quy(s) who wrote the firmware decide how your pictures look, instead of shooting raw and taking control of the image yourself? Because sometimes I have to shoot assembly line pre-school portraits up to 500 per weekend. No time to fiddle with raw.

07-08-2014, 10:13 AM	#11
Brooke Meyer Guest	Originally posted by hjoseph7 Because sometimes I have to shoot assembly line pre-school portraits up to 500 per weekend. No time to fiddle with raw. 500 isn't so much. I cover some events for a local online publication (besides my dance work where 2,000 exposures per performance in typical). Open 100 DNGs at a time in Camera Raw, delete the stuff that doesn't work, apply global adjustments, save, batch rename, batch out to JPEGs, upload to publication for editor and public galleries. Here's are a bunch Cary Citizen Community including last Friday,

07-08-2014, 10:30 AM	#12
IchabodCrane Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,728	The neon reds are a bigger problem on Pentax cameras than most others which I attribute to Pentax trying to make their JPEG engine create "punch" OOC JPEG images. I haven't found an acceptable solution in two years of trying that deals with the reds without adversely affecting other colors. Shoot RAW if it's a problem which is really a poor excuse for Ricoh not to fix this.

07-08-2014, 10:52 AM	#13
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,048 Original Poster	Originally posted by IchabodCrane The neon reds are a bigger problem on Pentax cameras than most others which I attribute to Pentax trying to make their JPEG engine create "punch" OOC JPEG images. I haven't found an acceptable solution in two years of trying that deals with the reds without adversely affecting other colors. Shoot RAW if it's a problem which is really a poor excuse for Ricoh not to fix this. In Photoshop I only de-saturated the Red channel by about 40%(estimate) . I notice it still gave me a slightly blue tint and it also toned down the orange in some of the flowers. I could have created a mask to only hit the roof of the ice-cream stand but, these pictures are not going into publication. ---------- Post added 07-08-14 at 12:54 PM ---------- Originally posted by Brooke Meyer 500 isn't so much. I cover some events for a local online publication (besides my dance work where 2,000 exposures per performance in typical). Open 100 DNGs at a time in Camera Raw, delete the stuff that doesn't work, apply global adjustments, save, batch rename, batch out to JPEGs, upload to publication for editor and public galleries. Here's are a bunch Cary Citizen Community including last Friday, "Open 100 DNGs at a time in Camera Raw, delete the stuff that doesn't work, apply global adjustments, save, batch rename, batch out to JPEGs, upload to publication for editor and public galleries. " My boss would have a fit !